The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XIV
TAXATION AND FINANCE

Chapter 218
FINANCIAL MATTERS PERTAINING TO POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 218.80

218.80 Public Bid Disclosure Act.—

(1) This section may be cited as the “Public Bid Disclosure Act.”

(2) It is the intent of the Legislature that a local governmental entity shall disclose all of the local governmental entity’s permits or fees, including, but not limited to, all license fees, permit fees, impact fees, or inspection fees, payable by the contractor to the unit of government that issued the bidding documents or other request for proposal, unless such permits or fees are disclosed in the bidding documents or other request for proposal for the project at the time the project was let for bid. It is further the intent of the Legislature to prohibit local governments from halting construction to collect any undisclosed permits or fees which were not disclosed or included in the bidding documents or other request for proposal for the project at the time the project was let for bid.

(3) Bidding documents or other request for proposal issued for bids by a local governmental entity, or any public contract entered into between a local governmental entity and a contractor shall disclose each permit or fee which the contractor will have to pay before or during construction, the dollar amount or the percentage method or the unit method of all permits or fees which may be required by the local government as a part of the contract, and a listing of all other governmental entities that may have additional permits or fees generated by the project. If the request for proposal does not require the response to include a final fixed price, the local governmental entity is not required to disclose any fees or assessments in the request for proposal. However, at least 10 days prior to requiring the contractor to submit a final fixed price for the project, the local governmental entity shall make the disclosures required in this section. Any of the local governmental entity’s permits or fees that are not disclosed in the bidding documents, other request for proposal, or a contract between a local government and a contractor shall not be assessed or collected after the contract is let. No local government shall halt construction under any public contract or delay completion of the contract in order to collect any permits or fees which were not provided for or specified in the bidding documents, other request for proposal, or the contract.

(4) This section does not require disclosure in the bidding documents of any permits or fees imposed as a result of a change order or a modification to the contract. The local government shall disclose all permits or fees imposed as a result of a change order or a modification to the contract prior to the date the contractor is required to submit a price for the change order or modification.

History.—s. 1, ch. 93-76; s. 1, ch. 2020-154.

F.S. 218.80 on Google Scholar

F.S. 218.80 on Casetext

Amendments to 218.80

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 218.80

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 218.80.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

In DRAKE, v., 434 B.R. 11 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2010)

. . . 1996 $ 0.00 $ 507.85 $ 118.92 1995 9/25/1997 $25,241.00 $50,767.19 $19,307.35 1996 9/26/1997 $ 0.00 $ 218.80 . . .

In B. J. PACKING, INC. VAUGHAN, v. THOMPSON, HINE FLORY,, 161 B.R. 397 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1993)

. . . This Court must determine if the Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Eighteen and 80/100 Dollars ($39,-218.80 . . .

NAGER ELECTRIC COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES, 442 F.2d 936 (Ct. Cl. 1971)

. . . The other two deduction items in defendant’s counterclaim, i. e., the $18,-218.80 claimed as a setoff . . .

UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND IN DAVIDSON AND RUTHERFORD COUNTIES, TENNESSEE, H. E., 436 F.2d 395 (6th Cir. 1970)

. . . At the time of the taking, April 5, 1966, appellee Davenport owned 218.80 acres, 49 of which he had purchased . . . The award of $72,400 was arrived at by ascribing a value of $97,000 to the total 218.80 acres owned by . . . An appraiser, testifying for the government, valued Davenport’s 218.80 acre tract at $80,000, or about . . . The Commission’s valuation of $97,000 for the entire 218.80 acres that Davenport owned at the time of . . .

WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. TANTALO, E., 273 F. Supp. 7 (D. Conn. 1967)

. . . and included coverage for its operation by their son James; the premium on the renewal policy was $218.80 . . .